Ticagrelor vs Clopidogrel for Complex Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in Chronic Coronary Syndrome.
chronic coronary syndrome
complex percutaneous coronary intervention
coronary artery disease
myocardial infarction
ticagrelor
Journal
JACC. Cardiovascular interventions
ISSN: 1876-7605
Titre abrégé: JACC Cardiovasc Interv
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 101467004
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
12 Feb 2024
12 Feb 2024
Historique:
received:
23
08
2023
revised:
04
12
2023
accepted:
05
12
2023
medline:
15
2
2024
pubmed:
15
2
2024
entrez:
14
2
2024
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Whether ticagrelor in chronic coronary syndrome patients undergoing complex percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) can prevent cardiovascular events is unknown. The authors sought to evaluate outcomes of complex PCI and the efficacy of ticagrelor vs clopidogrel in stable patients randomized in the ALPHEUS (Assessment of Loading with the P2Y All PCI procedures were blindly reviewed and classified as complex if they had at least 1 of the following criteria: stent length >60 mm, 2-stent bifurcation, left main, bypass graft, chronic total occlusion, use of atherectomy or guiding catheter extensions, multiwire technique, multiple stents. The primary endpoint was a composite of type 4a or b myocardial infarction (MI) and major myocardial injury during the 48 hours after PCI. We compared the event rates according to the presence or not of complex PCI criteria and evaluated the interaction with ticagrelor or clopidogrel. Among the 1,866 patients randomized, 910 PCI (48.3%) were classified as complex PCI. The primary endpoint was more frequent in complex PCI (45.6% vs 26.6%; P < 0.001) driven by higher rates of type 4 MI and angiographic complications (12.2% vs 4.8 %; P < 0.001 and 19.3% vs 8.6%; P < 0.05, respectively). The composite of death, MI, and stroke at 48 hours (12.7% vs 5.1 %; P < 0.05) and at 30 days (13.4% vs 5.3%; P < 0.05) was more frequent in complex PCI. No interaction was found between PCI complexity and the randomized treatment for the primary endpoint (P In chronic coronary syndrome, patients undergoing a complex PCI have higher rates of periprocedural and cardiovascular events that are not reduced by ticagrelor as compared with clopidogrel.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Whether ticagrelor in chronic coronary syndrome patients undergoing complex percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) can prevent cardiovascular events is unknown.
OBJECTIVES
OBJECTIVE
The authors sought to evaluate outcomes of complex PCI and the efficacy of ticagrelor vs clopidogrel in stable patients randomized in the ALPHEUS (Assessment of Loading with the P2Y
METHODS
METHODS
All PCI procedures were blindly reviewed and classified as complex if they had at least 1 of the following criteria: stent length >60 mm, 2-stent bifurcation, left main, bypass graft, chronic total occlusion, use of atherectomy or guiding catheter extensions, multiwire technique, multiple stents. The primary endpoint was a composite of type 4a or b myocardial infarction (MI) and major myocardial injury during the 48 hours after PCI. We compared the event rates according to the presence or not of complex PCI criteria and evaluated the interaction with ticagrelor or clopidogrel.
RESULTS
RESULTS
Among the 1,866 patients randomized, 910 PCI (48.3%) were classified as complex PCI. The primary endpoint was more frequent in complex PCI (45.6% vs 26.6%; P < 0.001) driven by higher rates of type 4 MI and angiographic complications (12.2% vs 4.8 %; P < 0.001 and 19.3% vs 8.6%; P < 0.05, respectively). The composite of death, MI, and stroke at 48 hours (12.7% vs 5.1 %; P < 0.05) and at 30 days (13.4% vs 5.3%; P < 0.05) was more frequent in complex PCI. No interaction was found between PCI complexity and the randomized treatment for the primary endpoint (P
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
In chronic coronary syndrome, patients undergoing a complex PCI have higher rates of periprocedural and cardiovascular events that are not reduced by ticagrelor as compared with clopidogrel.
Identifiants
pubmed: 38355265
pii: S1936-8798(23)01624-2
doi: 10.1016/j.jcin.2023.12.011
pii:
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
359-370Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2024 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
Funding Support and Author Disclosures The ALPHEUS trial was led by the ACTION Study Group, an academic research organization based at the Pitié-Salpêtrière Hospital (Paris, France). The study was sponsored by Assistance Publique-Hopitaux de Paris and was funded by an unrestricted grant from AstraZeneca. The present work was supported by a grant of the French Federation of Cardiology. Prof Lattuca has received research grants from Biotronik, Boston Scientific, Daiichi Sankyo, Fédération Française de Cardiologie, and the Institute of CardioMetabolism and Nutrition; consulting fees from Daiichi Sankyo and Eli Lilly; and lecture fees from AstraZeneca, Medtronic, and Novartis. Prof Cayla has received consulting fees from Edwards Lifesciences, Medtronic, and Microport CRM; and lecture fees from Amgen, AstraZeneca, Abbott, Bayer, Biotronik, Bristol Myers Squibb, Edwards Lifesciences, Microport, Medtronic, Pfizer, and Sanofi. Prof Ducrocq has received speaker and consulting fees from Abbott, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Bristol Myers Squibb, Novo Nordisk, and Sanofi; has served on steering committees for Amgen, Novo Nordisk, and Janssen; and has been a proctor for Boston Scientific. Dr Laredo has received speaker or consulting fees from Abbott and Biotronik. Dr Kala has received consulting fees from Boston Scientific; and lecture fees from AstraZeneca, Edwards Lifesciences, Novartis, Servier, and Terumo. Prof Varenne has received research grants from Abbott and Boston Scientific; and lecture fees from Abbott, AstraZeneca, Boston Scientific, and Servier. Prof Spaulding has received consulting fees from Edwards Lifesciences, Medtronic, Sonivie, Techwald, and Valcare; has received speaker fees from Amgen and Edwards Lifesciences; and is stock shareholder of Techwald and Valcare. Prof Beygui has received consulting and lecture fees from Medtronic, Novartis, and Pfizer; and research grants from Biosensors and Medtronic. Dr Rangé has received speaker or consulting fees from Abbott and Microport. Prof Vicaut has received consulting or speaker fees from Abbott, Amgen, Bristol Myers Squibb, Celgene, LFB, Pfizer, and Sanofi. Prof Collet has received consulting and lecture fees from AstraZeneca, Boston Scientific, Bristol Myers Squibb, COR2ED, Lead-Up, Medtronic, and WebMD. Prof Montalescot has received research grants and consulting or speaker fees from Abbott, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Ascendia, Bayer, Bristol Myers Squibb, Boehringer Ingelheim, Boston Scientific, Celecor, CSL Behring, Idorsia, Lilly, Novartis, Novo, Opalia, Pfizer, Quantum Genomics, Sanofi, and Terumo. Prof Silvain has received research grants and consulting or speaker fees from AstraZeneca, Bayer HealthCare SAS, Abbott Medical, Biotronik, Boehringer Ingelheim France, CSL Behring SA, Gilead Science, and Sanofi France; and is stock Shareholder of Pharmaseeds, Terumo, and Zoll. All other authors have reported that they have no relationships relevant to the contents of this paper to disclose.